Skip to main content

About your Search

20120925
20121003
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12
in the telegram that after the invasion and the overflow of the taliban in afghanistan, my sense was and my sense with hindsight i would say was that the focus heads which very quickly to iraq and indeed i was ambassador in iraq from 2005 to 2006 during the period when we had taken our eye off the ball in afghanistan and it was clear to me that the governments focus, the public focus was on iraq and having arrived in afghanistan in 2010, it struck me there was a period were some of the things we were doing in 2010 and 2009 were things that might've been done earlier, so that is what i think. we did begin cooling up the security forces in afghanistan early enough in my view and perhaps we hadn't achieved as much as we should have done. i think the focus on iraq during that period of 2003 to 2007. >> when did you realize -- [inaudible] >> it was in hindsight. i think by the time i got there at the focus has switched back to afghanistan. i think some of the decisions that already been made. the surge in troops for instance, the u.s. surgeon troops and the additional troops that were sent to helmand,
se would go that were the most to credible critical. the places that the taliban was to take over, those at risk fors gains and potentially a takeover by country. instead, we wind up sending the first wave of new forces to abal part of the country with afgha relatively few people and i discovered the answer was sillym tribal rivalries. not iny afghanistan but thewn pentagon. uni it turned out that way that the troops were u.s. marines andn they wanted to bring down helicopters, their own logistics units and they didn't want to d work with u.s. army soldiers inr the areas in and around the city of kandahar.other here was the tail of our own services fighting with each other instead of fighting and common purpose against theinter. enemy. and the stories go on. oth there weras internal fightingnti within the state department, within the u.s. agency for international development. in one other tail i've recounted some in the book, we have somete serious fighting between president obama's national was i security team and senior people at the state department over tht whole question of w
everyone, pakistan, national community in which the taliban agree to lay down their arms and they form a political party, there may be some deal done that gives them some positions in government in the run-up to the election as there is to perform political party community talk about amnesties. there would need to be cease-fires. all of that is asserted and you would to discuss any genuine political process. that hasn't started. >> to the extent to which we, we the whole of the international community has been participating, provided a substitute economy and afghanistan to start up allow me to develop so far. is that the incentive? is there some economic incentive that brings them into this process? is it that that's going to solve the problem is it's not constitutional matters in human rights and everything clicks >> we need to start reducing the amount of money these then on afghanistan. >> howell to be sustainable within itself? >> the economic process is one where we have to keep helping the afghans fun the development for 10 years beyond what they get on with develop
. and they are also a sign of, i believe taliban december i ration. the fact is in the last several fighting seasonses since the surge the taliban has not been able to gain territory and hold it. they have been losing it. it is an a tactic to try to break the wealth of the coalition. and in many indications, a cases they aren't taliban at all. they are disgruntled folks of ptsd. there are a lots of different explanations. it's a tragic and very upsetting when the things happen. but they are a tiny, tiny, tiny fraction percentage of the overall intersections that are happening which are keeping us on track towards the transition timeline. >> now, i think we need to be cautious about overlearning from any of these incidents. we don't have enough distance and evening of the events that occurred over the last couple of weeks to draw conclusions about what it means. but i would question is the assumption on the other side. they completely understand this complex real any a way that is immune from the understanding of democrat and had only they be in charge everything would have been fine. it's noter clear
-value targets. he was a hagee commander. they had in the season of al qaeda, some sort of truth with the taliban, but they are nasty characters. foreign fighters from chechnya in the are not really there to fight against to fight from afghanistan or for their version cure mercenaries and what they're doing in the area is recruiting while pressing people into fighting for the hague he was rumored to have service to air missiles he was also credited with than bush in the cornball volley that had caught the attention of some of the commanders said they decided they had to go off the volley and take care of this network because he was able to export a lot of the violence from the stevan to the idea was to get him and take care of the safe-haven. what they ran into this not only the excess in geography because a was a hard place to get to the roles of fighting the restrictions placed. you've seen these night raids that are highly regulated, who controls the battle space of the regulated and it takes a long time to get emission plan and one of the things they were running into is how to get their, wit
the fragmentation and taliban and puk are moving closer toward iran and you see it played out internally within the curd stan region. they will not permit, i don't see them saying anything about a independent kurdstan. they need the border open. >> it's an interesting point. on the southeast side, just to quickly -- i think traditionally the saudi arabias were told to e pose any kurdish independents. but i think this is changing. the whole war by proxy which i mentioned earlier between the saudi and the iranians would be perhaps likely to encourage more inindepends from the kurtish territory. to weaken iraq and therefore to weaken iran. and, you know, we were talking about the suenism and the kurds could be part of that. in that sense, that could be, i think they might be a switch today in the sue i did. on thepipeline that will pipeline will never reopen to saudi arabia. the saudis already transform the pipeline was built i was living in -- was built between the field down the saudi arabia and to, you know, west ward route directly to [inaudible] most of the portion that is going west is not b
the taliban and any conventional sense because they were guerrilla army. they come from the local passion population of pakistan and afghanistan. the only way is to do a president of undersecretary to negotiate or promote negotiation between the afghan government. keep up the pressure and the taliban, the draw down american forces. that is the only way out for the united states and we have this terrible problem, we are training hundreds of thousands of soldiers and some of them have been turning their guns on their american allies and killing their soldiers. so the military quite rightly has put restrictions and inhibit these attacks. but it does show the afghan government every week. you have to wonder if the afghan government take responsibility and do a much better job of people in the military so they don't have to room people. >> one less call for a guest in new jersey. democrat, hi there. >> caller: hi, i want to talk about the caller who talked about romney running for president on his own agenda. i think he's not the right person. i can't see a man who can't run our country and br
for a deal with the taliban. they're still back even further as the troops pull out. an influx of american troops in this photo. push the taliban back but did not batter them in a recent fight. looking at some other international news stories along the lines of what the last caller was talking about. the link to the libya attacks from the "wall street journal." the u.s. track egyptian officers free the prison in the arab spurring and the middle east and north africa and also in the presence of militants. the problem now emerging as the potential new terrorist threat. fighters link to one free militant, muhammad jamal took place in libya that killed four americans. u.s. officials based believe on the initial report. and the u.s. has pulled all personnel from eastern libyan city of van -- benghazi. that is the story in the washington post. tomorrow will focus on domestic issues. are you tuning in? what will you be listening for if you intend on to mannion? if you are not going to watch or listen, why? that is the question this morning. the candidate's policies are very clear by now, putting
have little understanding and of course that indirectly and directly led to the creation of the taliban and al qaeda came back to bite us with 9/11. so i think that experience is compelling us to be much more careful. we have intelligence agents on the ground he reappeared amongst the opposition, trying to determine who the different factions are, who we can help try to find out which groups perhaps i'm more influenced by radical islamists, ideology and methods. and so there's a lot we don't know. so i think that's what i said about prudent caution. we need to know much more about the landscape. it is much or are complex and complicated than libyan situation. >> host: talking to david lesch, author of a new book, "syria: the fall of the house of assad." that was the leader many times, talked to top syrian officials as well. topeka, kansas, go ahead, paul. >> host: >> caller: are there to say first of a good morning and thank you for taking my call. i would like to say that the united states is a very proud entity and its military is one of the greatest in the world. it is the greatest i
the taliban. i didn't talk much about foreign affairs and threatening the benefit packages which is why the veterans signed up for and deserve it. i think they'll vote against him. finally, the jewish vote, i trust medved, trust them both, and they told me in the entire adult life they never saw the jewish-american vote so leans towards voting for republican in such strong numbers. there's one word "israel" written all over it. president obama is hose still to israel. left benjamin netanyahu in the basement, say call me if something changes, did not treat him like the best ally in the middle east and probably in the world and a democratic country at that with elected leaders in the tradition is strong and ought to be supported. mitt romney is a friend of israel, and that matters to any friend of israel, jewish or not jewish in the united states. >> thank you. >> there's agreement in the room that we need to reform large entitlement programs as you mentioned, but i think there's agreement that any effort of reform is fought tooth and nail by established senate departments so if you look
district vote. look at how obama is running in the philly suburbs are some of taliban 2008 and so on. so definite looking like advantage obama in pennsylvania. michigan is another state where the romney campaign thought they might have a run. that's just not happening at this point. michigan is pretty decisively on the side of obama. look again at the geographical pattern of the vote, running in the detroit metro area, 44% of the statewide vote as he did in 2008. not much going on there for romney. wisconsin is a state where if you're going to crack the midwest code, given what was happening with ohio, they thought perhaps they could do it in wisconsin. the problem is twofold for them. one is if you look at the level of demographic change that's taking place in wisconsin, it's quite startling according to these current data. a three-point increase in a share of minority eligible voters. a seven-point decline among white noncollege voters, eligible voters. these are huge changes and odyssey they do exactly against within inches of the romney team in wisconsin. so maybe they thought if the
believe what the taliban stance for or al qaeda stands for clicks general chi on he was head of isi when they were recruiting and opened a fundraising raising and training in pakistan. how can you persuade them to stop in pakistan. >> i disagree profoundly with which you said. my contact with pakistanis and yours is much longer than mine, but i would like to coax you to agree with this and that there is a feeling of enormous administration. sometimes comes out as the man in the mood problem. you can put them in and then moon you can do anything. that notion of omnipotence. the question is what the own governments have a new house three, four, five sentences it does come out that they may blame us for the perceived support of people that govern badly, but the anger is with the way they are governed. fundamentally, we look at polling data on but i would ay is unscientific not islamabad country club data starting with other kinds of people. there is an enormous frustration with the united states, but an enormous desire to give its approval to pakistan. almost unhealthy desire for pakistan -
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12